W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-respimg@w3.org > December 2016

Re: aspect ratio as an attribute

From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2016 08:50:43 +0100
To: "Adam van den Hoven" <adam@littlefyr.com>, steve@steveclaflin.com
Cc: "Alex Bell" <alex@bellandwhistle.net>, public-respimg@w3.org, "Paul Deschamps" <pdescham49@gmail.com>, "Yoav Weiss" <yoav@yoav.ws>, "Tommy Hodgins" <tomhodgins@gmail.com>, "Jason Grigsby" <jason@cloudfour.com>, "Greg Whitworth" <gwhit@microsoft.com>, "Hall, Charles (DET-MRM)" <Charles.Hall@mrm-mccann.com>, "Jonathan Kingston" <jonathan@jooped.co.uk>, "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Message-ID: <op.ys4detksidj3kv@simons-mbp>
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 16:56:09 +0100, <steve@steveclaflin.com> wrote:

> So it seems that we could use "aspect" as an attribute on source tags,  
> and not for img.

No, it's possible to introduce an <img aspect> attribute and have whatever  
behavior we want it to have.

We can also introduce <source width height> attributes with whatever  

What we *can't* do is change what the existing <img width height>  
attributes do.

> I would like to then be able to say "A developer that wanted to use  
> aspect could use picture if they want to supply the aspect value",  
> except that there would be one image in the collection that has no  
> aspect information, the one that is placed with img instead of source.
> I don't like the thought of putting that "default" aspect in the picture  
> tag itself, but the only other solutions I can see are:
> 1. to also allow aspect for the img tag, or
> 2. allow the presence of a source tag that duplicates the img  
> information.

Simon Pieters
Opera Software
Received on Tuesday, 27 December 2016 07:51:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:06:20 UTC